Tell Me What You Think...

... of my review, AND of the movie I reviewed.

So???? - Do you think I'm spot on with my review or do you think I'm way off base? Let me know by checking "You are correct, sir" or "You are an idiot."

You can also give the movie a 'star' rating. Let me know how you thought of the film by rating it yourself! Just give a 1,2,3,4, or 5 star review. As always, feel free to leave your mark in the comments for each entry.

Tell the world about my site! You can now link to any of my review by choosing one of the social media buttons at the bottom of each post!


Sure, why not.

You may find yourself writing the story in your mind and you will always be one scene ahead of the movie. The formula stays the course from beginning to end and doesn't deviate. You know exactly when the nerdy friends are gonna start getting pissed at their much less stereotypically nerdy friend for abandoning them, and you know exactly when he's gonna get the girl. You know when the lead is gonna lose his cool and realize that he's "not the same person" as he was when the movie started and you know the bad guy is gonna get his comeuppance.

So if it's so predictable, why should you see it? It's a movie about some very smart, good looking people beating the system... a system that we all wish we could beat. They win a lot of money and spend it on a lot of things we would like to spend money on. It's a fantasy that we all wish we could fulfill. Throw in the colorful scenery and flashing lights of Vegas and you have a feel good movie for everybody. This movie doesn't even come close to the border of PG-13 and R. It's safely in the PG-13 range so even kids can see it. It is rated PG-13 for a reason, though. There is a small amount of violence (which is shown in the trailer) and the beginning of a sex scene, so it isn't completely innocent. They even go to a strip club where there is, apparently, no nudity allowed.

Just see it, I'm sure you'll have fun.



It's not anti-war. Some of the characters are anti-war, but the movie doesn't come off as a diatribe on "where we went wrong" or "what we're really doing over there." It's actually more of a pro-troop movie... and who isn't "pro-troop" (besides the Westboro Baptist church)?

The acting is adequate. The cast and director do a good job showing why soldiers do what they do, the brotherhood that develops within the squad and the psychological impact that war can have on a soldier.

This movie isn't "based on a true story". If it's accurate... if soldiers are being forced into a second, third, and fourth tour just because there aren't enough volunteers to take their place, that's troubling. On the other hand, the film may be provoking the issue. If I were considering a career in the military as a means to get an education, or for any reason, and then I saw this movie and I found out that I may be forced to extend my contract with the U.S. government, I would be less likely to enlist. Putting this story out there may be inadvertently creating more stories just like it.

UPDATE - So, I was at work and this guy came into the theatre in full military uniform. I assumed he was there to see Stop-Loss, but what I didn't assume is that he had just returned home Afghanistan, thinking he was done, only to find out that he had been stop-lossed. He is going to Iraq next month. It just kinda made the whole thing real. Plus "If it's accurate..." can be removed from the statement in the last paragraph. It's accurate.

Drillbit Taylor


Drillbit Taylor wanted to be Superbad in the worst way. Actually, maybe it was Superbad in the worst way. The worst way Superbad could have been. The fat wise ass and the skinny, awkward kid trying to maneuver through High School with as little pain as possible. Superbad: Episode I. It wanted to be shocking and vulgar, but I guess they also wanted a PG-13 rating, so they used Eminem's "Ass Like That" as part of the soundtrack and muted out the word "ass". Why even use the song??

Also, I officially hate Owen Wilson.



This really falls into the middle category (between "yes" and "no") of "if you're into this kind of thing...". I really can't recommend this to anyone who wants for a recomendation for a good movie. If you just want to have a good time, and you're into post-apocalyptic style blood-baths, rent it. There is nothing about this movie that makes the theatre experience necessary.

I haven't seen Mad Max, but I imagine that Doomsday is comparable. There are no twists or turns, the characters expect to be in harms way when they go in, and they are. Everything is spelled out for us from the get and everything goes as planned if not for a few bumps along the way.

The only interesting aspect of the movie is the "theme" of the two different societies that are formed once they lose all connection with their government and the outside world. One group of survivors centers their way of life around the British punkrock culture and the other reverts back to feudal times building their new villages around castles. If this seems lame to you, you're not alone. I realize that I'm digging.

Funny Games


I really don't know what to write. This movie is beyond strange. It is the darkest comedy I've ever seen. I seriously recommend watching Very Bad Things and American Psycho before viewing Funny Games. If you don't like those two movies, you probably will not enjoy this one, because the games? Not so funny.

This movie is flat out creepy. It's bizarre from beginning to end. Awkward. The creepiness is provided generously by Michael Pitt and Brady Corbet who's pure evil characters thoroughly enjoy the pain and torture that they so very politely inflict on their hostages. It gets even eerier when they begin including us in their sadistic games.

"Why don't you just kill us?"
"You shouldn't forget the importance of entertainment."

The suspense is palpable and you will laugh to break the tension... you will also laugh because it's funny... then you'll question your sanity. There are plenty of boring moments. I mean, at some points in the movie it's like watching a cell phone dry. During those boring moments, however, you are constantly looking over the victims' shoulders.

This is a sick, twisted, bloody, funny, uncomfortable, bizarre film... I think I loved it and I think I want to see it again. Now I'm gonna go get something to eat.

Dr. Seuss' Horton Hears a Who


The animation is flawless, the voice acting is spot-on and the G-rated humor is very funny. Try to keep in mind, however, that I went in with VERY low expectations. Did Horton have it's flaws... sure. Off the top of my head I can name 3:

1. It was too long... not by much, but it almost became tedious. I was wondering how they were going to stretch the book into a 1 hour and 45 minute movie, and it seems they found a way. I'm sure they could have left 20 or so minutes on the cutting room floor and the movie would have held up fine.

2. REO Speedwagon. I have a problem when anyone breaks out into song in a movie for absolutely no reason (with the exception of musicals and Magnolia). But if you're gonna do it, at least pick a song with some significance to the story. (After re-reading this paragraph I felt it was important to tell you that I would be concerned if someone broke out into song for absolutely no reason, not in a movie, as well.)

3. The underlying theme. I haven't read Horton Hears a Who in quite some time. I was always under the impression that it was about respect; "a person is a person, no matter how small". I don't recall a religious theme at all, but maybe I was just ignorant to it at the time. It was blatant in the movie, though. Believing in a "giant invisible elephant in the sky" and having faith in that "elephant" even if he doesn't seem to be addressing your specific concerns. They reversed it as well. Horton was clearly being persecuted as an iconoclast by an angry mob of non-believers who didn't want Horton tainting the common doctrine "... if you can't see it, hear it or feel it, then it doesn't exist". I guess that's not really a "flaw". I just hate when movies are too didactic and unfortunately this movie has a touch of preachiness.

That being said, the voice cast is amazing with Jim Carrey, Steve Carell, Carol Burnett, Amy Poehler, Will Arnett, Seth Rogen, Isla Fisher, Jaime Pressly, and Jonah Hill. Plus, the animation was absolute eye candy and the screenplay is tight and witty. Go see Horton Hears a Who.

The Other Boleyn Girl

Yeah, if you loved the book (I didn't read it)... and even then, wait until it's on cable.

I struggled with this one at every point on my "Other Boleyn Girl adventure". I really wanted to see something, but I had worked all day and knew that if I went home, I wouldn't be going back out. So, I decided to stay at work and watch something that we were showing there. The issue is that, because of timing, my choices were The Other Boleyn Girl or Step Up 2 the Streets. The struggle, as it turns out, was choosing between going home and watching Boleyn.

I chose to watch the movie and even while I was watching it I struggled. This time with whether I should stay; continue watching the movie or go home. I decided to stay.

Now I'm home. And I'm struggling again. I'm struggling because I don't really remember much about the movie. And it's not my fault... it's the movies fault. Nothing stands out, good or bad. Not the acting, not the directing, not the cinematography, score, or costumes. The whole thing was just average. Underneath all of the unimpressive film making was really just a 16th century edition of Maury Povitch or Jerry Springer.

At the end of it all, after all Anne did, the betrayal and the deceit, we're meant to feel bad for her; as indicated by the lush swell of music as the axe falls. (This is a historical drama, folks... you should know what happens.)

See it if you want to, but don't expect to be blown away by anything.

The Bank Job


All movies should be required to be at least this good.

There was nothing spectacular about it, but it was very entertaining. Since it's based on a true story, it was interesting as well. The acting, directing and writing won't be winning any awards, but they're fine. There are a lot of subplots, but they are all handled well by the writers and director and they each get the attention they deserve. This is a well made, straight forward heist movie full of corruption and intrigue.

A car dealer with a dodgy past and new family, Terry (Jason Statham) has always avoided major-league scams. But when Martine (Saffron Burrows), a beautiful model from his old neighborhood, offers him a lead on a foolproof bank hit on London's Baker Street, Terry recognizes the opportunity of a lifetime. Martine targets a roomful of safe deposit boxes worth millions in cash and jewelry. But Terry and his crew don't realize the boxes also contain a treasure trove of dirty secrets - secrets that will thrust them into a deadly web of corruption and illicit scandal that spans London's criminal underworld, the highest echelons of the British government, and the Royal Family itself...the true story of a heist gone all the right ways.

10,000 B.C.

God, NO.

This is Apocalypto for imbiciles.

If you haven't seen Apocalypto... rent it, or just buy it. Set in the Mayan civilization, when a man's idyllic presence is brutally disrupted by a violent invading force, he is taken on a perilous journey to a world ruled by fear and oppression where a harrowing end awaits him. Through a twist of fate and spurred by the power of his love for his woman and his family he will make a desperate break to return home and to ultimately save his way of life.

In Apocalypto, none of the characters speak English. None of the characters form bonds with deadly prehistoric creatures who then come back to save them at extremely opportune moments. None of the characters die and then come back to life. In Apocalypto, when a woman gets whipped until she bleeds, she at least winces a little bit. Finally, they didn't feel the need to narrate Apocalypto so that people could follow it's simplistic storyline.

There are absolutly NO redeeming qualities in 10,000 B.C.. The acting is obviously going to be terrible, but it's not as if the actors had anything decent to work with. On top of that, this is clearly a "special effects movie"... WITH ATROCIOUS SPECIAL EFFECTS!!!!

As far as the direction is concerned, with Stargate, Independence Day, Godzilla, The Patriot, The Day After Tomorrow and now 10,000 B.C. proving to be a steady decline in quality and entertainment... the path of Roland Emmerich's career as a director is such that I fear for the fate of mankind. Should he continue to make films in this manner, peoples' heads may begin imploding in 2009 with the release of his next movie called 2012. I can only imagine what the year 2012 will look like. The special effects will really have to be ahead of their time... If he can't make 10,000 B.C. look realistic, I don't know if he'll be able to handle the future.


NO!!! yes.

I'm embarrassed to say it, but I kinda liked it a little bit.

Now please don't get me wrong. This is not a very good movie. The dialogue is crappy and the acting is terrible. Hayden Christiansen is horrific (as usual) Sammy J. phones it in again. Jamie Bell is good, actually he tends to be good in whatever he does (see Billy Elliot and The Chumscrubber). Rachel Bilson was good in the two movies I've seen her in (this one included).

If one new anything about cinematography, one might say that if you can make standing on top of the Sphinx seem like it's not such a big deal... you've failed as a cinematographer. See, what you don't know about the shot used in the poster, is that the camera continues to pan out showing the pyramids and the rest of the Egyptian landscape, and when it stops, it looks like standing on top of the Sphinx head is comparable to climbing on top of a car.

It also seemed like two kids were (very enthusiastically) coming up with the story as the movie progressed:

"...and then, what if, what if they have this machine... and if they turn the machine on right where someone 'jumped' from, they can follow the 'jumper' to where ever he went?"

"but how would they know that a 'jumper' had been there?"

"Well, they have this aerosol spray can, that if they spray it, they can hear whats going on at the other end of the wormhole that the 'jumper' went through."

...and scene.

That's the kind of shit we're dealing with here... and yet (I'm sad to say) it still just drew me in. I'm not really sure what's wrong with me. I think I'm gonna go see a psychiatrist in the morning. And what was with Sam Jackson's hair? Is he from the future? I'm ranting. This was a terrible movie. I liked it though. Something is seriously wrong with me. You should go see Jumper. NO!!! fine, yes.

**UPDATE** I think I'm OK... do not under any circumstances pay to see this movie... yeah, I'm good.